This is absolutely true for me. Repeatedly force your products into my consciousness and I will actively discriminate against ever buying them. I utterly despise being marketed to.
The Internet
Re: The Internet
08/10/2003 - 17/08/2018RCHD wrote:Snowy is my favourite. He's a metal God.
10501
Re: The Internet
How does one get uBlock on android? I've not managed it so far.
-- To be completed at some point --
Re: The Internet
A bit late jumping into this one, but a few thoughts on what to expect:
- Fragmentation of the internet by geographic blocks - US, Europe, China in particular
- acceleration in migration to subscription based services
- GDPR2 to refine the BS privacy / cookies model so that cookies or whatever model replace it are defined in your browser settings, so you don't have to accept bloody disclaimers on every site. your preferences will be stored at the browser or system level
- cloud based operating systems replacing local Operating Systems
- More efforts to move services to closed operating eco systems preventing the install of anything you want
- largely increased policing and monitoring of VPNs, illegal streaming and increased / more visible penalties for such use
- possibly global monitoring / surveillance via chipset embedded identifiers
- digital voting on all elections
- streaming of all games instead of local devices
- access to the internet pretty much 24/7 everywhere, including aircraft etc
- horrific advertising versus subscriptions
Proud PW Member since 15/10/2003
A lurktastic 2678 posts!
Re: The Internet
I don't see digital voting ever happening. I hope it never happens, at least.
Tom Scott has a good video on it, IIRC. Software is too complex and relatively easy to fuck with compared with simple, tried-and-tested paper-based votes.
Tom Scott has a good video on it, IIRC. Software is too complex and relatively easy to fuck with compared with simple, tried-and-tested paper-based votes.
- Achtung Englander
- Posts: 2196
- Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:37 pm
- Location: Wokingham
Re: The Internet
elgaucho wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 8:53 amA bit late jumping into this one, but a few thoughts on what to expect:
I think the golden age of the internet has peaked and gone. The future is all about control and increased monetisation, ladies and gentlemen.
- Fragmentation of the internet by geographic blocks - US, Europe, China in particular - I can see that happening. I think the US will get even more internet capping and China may seek to clamp down on even more internet usage.
- acceleration in migration to subscription based services - wholly agree. The cat is out of the bag and everybody will want a slice of that pie. I can even envision the BBC going down this road. Almost everything will be subscription based.
- GDPR2 to refine the BS privacy / cookies model so that cookies or whatever model replace it are defined in your browser settings, so you don't have to accept bloody disclaimers on every site. your preferences will be stored at the browser or system level
- cloud based operating systems replacing local Operating Systems - hmm I am not sure about that. Most people want to control of their own PC
- More efforts to move services to closed operating eco systems preventing the install of anything you want
- largely increased policing and monitoring of VPNs, illegal streaming and increased / more visible penalties for such use - Yep I can see VPN being outlawed or if VPN is identified on your system, some apps will not function
- possibly global monitoring / surveillance via chipset embedded identifiers
- digital voting on all elections - In the UK I think there is too much distrust to go down any route except pen and paper
- streaming of all games instead of local devices - nope I cannot see that happening for at least 15 more years.
- access to the internet pretty much 24/7 everywhere, including aircraft etc - people have been saying internet everywhere for years now and my experience of 3G/4G in the UK has been woeful. If you get good internet access you are lucky. BT is absolutely shit. To get to internet everywhere the government will need to throw hundreds of billions to get coverage up.
- horrific advertising versus subscriptions - yep I see this. I think advertising will just get worse and than it will become a battle between ad blockers and companies like Google who survive on ads allowing ad blocking apps on their platform. I would not be surprised if ad block software gets legislated out of use by lobbiest working for the big companies.
Games playing : Bioshock (Remastered) / Total War Britannia / Dirt 4
Re: The Internet
I just watched that video.
All his points are logical and structured, but he hasn't really persuaded me at all that it can't happen. Quite the contrary, i think all the problems he listed are problems that CAN be tackled. They have solutions. They will just take time.
And a large part of the "trust" issue is generational. When the next generation of digital kids gets into it, they're not going to be bogged down by the past. They're going to endorse this option.
Which doesn't mean Tom's arguments get laid to waste. It means they get addressed.
Here we have physical tokens which are used to log into a central government portal that tracks all sorts of things, from tax returns, to driving licence information, to requesting conviction certificates and other forms. It has an inbox between the govt and I that tells me the status on items, or allows me to raise requests. In all they cover tax, employment, family benefits, education, citizenship, transport, housing, health and social, and leisure. That's pretty damn comprehensive, and it's well secured.
As well as the token and securitised entry, any submissions have to be digitally signed.
The process works well, and, beyond cultural, traditional customs and anonymity of voting, all of which will change or be addressed over time, I see no barrier to it. I see the opposite. An opportunity to make legislation available to the masses, to allow them to read it, and vote on specific legislation, similar to the Swiss model.
You might not feel comfortable with it today, but it doesn't mean it's not coming.
And I think this year cemented the view that the world doesn't stop when people have to work from home. So if that's possible on the scale we've seen, this certainly is too.
Proud PW Member since 15/10/2003
A lurktastic 2678 posts!
Re: The Internet
Achtung Englander wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 4:56 pmelgaucho wrote: ↑Fri Jan 01, 2021 8:53 am
- cloud based operating systems replacing local Operating Systems - hmm I am not sure about that. Most people want to control of their own PC
It's not going to disappear overnight, but it's coming. And yes there will be 20 years of resistance to it, but the groundwork isn't far off. at all. And for all the other things I said the world would say not to... did they? microtransactions? DLC? ethical leaders? wearing masks? Paying over 100EUR for new games? To think otherwise is to kid yourself. Lowest common denominator, or progressives will bite, and the rest will be dragged along when they have no choice.- streaming of all games instead of local devices - nope I cannot see that happening for at least 15 more years.
There will be streaming exclusives in the next few years, at least.
Proud PW Member since 15/10/2003
A lurktastic 2678 posts!
Re: The Internet
Yup, this.
I've always argued that if I notice an area of my life that could be improved by way of purchasing material shit, I'll go forth and do my own damn research. I find advertising to be extremely patronising.
- Achtung Englander
- Posts: 2196
- Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:37 pm
- Location: Wokingham
Re: The Internet
Recommend the app Vanced Tube which is YouTube with no adverts. You cannot comment or delete files from library, but it's a god send from being bombarded with adverts
Games playing : Bioshock (Remastered) / Total War Britannia / Dirt 4
Re: The Internet
There's been quite some discussion in the news over the proposed Australian laws to make Google and social media companies like facebook pay news creators for articles they link to.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-55226316
My head has been spinning for a week trying to work out the chicken and the egg, and what could be being set in motion by the laws that are being proposed here.
One thing is for sure... the biggest loser is likely to be the consumer, and I'm not thrilled about the prospect of it.
So, in my mind:
- Before the internet we had print media
- The mass growth of the internet and search engines has forced media companies to go digital
- Media companies pay the search engines to improve their search results. As a standalone search engione, this is their monetisation model
- Australia now wants the SEARCH engine to pay the MEDIA to send them revenue generating users?
How does that even make sense?
Australia's legislative approach seems heavy handed and in the interests of protecting its local economy, contrary to best business practice.
However, it does raise some interesting questions about who controls the distribution of news.
We generally consider the search engine to be broadly neutral.
We acknowledge there are algorithms and sponsored links which direct us to the best results, but we acknowledge this is the result of mass data aggregation optimising results to get to the answer the customer wants as quickly as possible.
If we're looking for something specific, we acknowledge we have to use refined terms or tags to constrain the search.
Already some of the comments above are things that WE know (as in the demographic on this forum), but that events in the media in the last four years also highlight there are a laaaarge number of people who are less educated and will believe things that are told to them, irrespective of accuracy.
So, perhaps google and these big advertising companies DO need to make some changes. Changes like:
- Transparency on what is or isn't a sponsored link (I think this is broadly done)
- Transparency on the algorithms
- Transparency on whether customers are signed up to "experimental searches" or other control sets, and make these an "opt in" ( https://theconversation.com/google-is-l ... igs-154178 )
The really tricky one is the question of what to do about "fake news". What is the extent of responsibility of the search and social moguls with respect to disinformation? Where does free speech start and end? Who decides what's real or not? You can't legislate for that. As soon as politics are involved in determining what is real or not you end up with Tiananmen Square and Auschwitz and the Capitol Hill events never having happened.
At best you can mandate a banner or tagging that clarifies whether an article is an opinion piece or News (as in, purely factual). But that wouldn't prevent a FACTUAL news brief where the interviewee spouts the same crap. It would be news that they said it, so it doesn't solve the problem. These are tough times we're coming into, and the golden age of the internet is ending.
Coming back to the Australia thing... what could happen?
- Google drops all AU news results and Australia suffers more. Some small player may come along in due course, but if they're a news aggregator or site, how are they going to monetise themselves in order to pay these news sites? It's bonkers.
- We open the door to Google and search engines paying for the news they publish. Now they have an incentive to push the news that has the best ROI (they're a business after all). Next, other services want to be paid by google , and we move in a very troublesome direction. A search engine must pay to link to a site.... wow.
You're basically talking about fragmenting the internet. Google and Co will only show commercially viable results. Alternative search providers step in to try and fill the gap, but suddenly you don't have the single, homogenous and reliable search engine you've been using for 20 years.
The very shape of the internet could change as a result.
I'm sure there's other points of view, but I could really do with hearing some!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-55226316
My head has been spinning for a week trying to work out the chicken and the egg, and what could be being set in motion by the laws that are being proposed here.
One thing is for sure... the biggest loser is likely to be the consumer, and I'm not thrilled about the prospect of it.
So, in my mind:
- Before the internet we had print media
- The mass growth of the internet and search engines has forced media companies to go digital
- Media companies pay the search engines to improve their search results. As a standalone search engione, this is their monetisation model
- Australia now wants the SEARCH engine to pay the MEDIA to send them revenue generating users?
How does that even make sense?
Australia's legislative approach seems heavy handed and in the interests of protecting its local economy, contrary to best business practice.
However, it does raise some interesting questions about who controls the distribution of news.
We generally consider the search engine to be broadly neutral.
We acknowledge there are algorithms and sponsored links which direct us to the best results, but we acknowledge this is the result of mass data aggregation optimising results to get to the answer the customer wants as quickly as possible.
If we're looking for something specific, we acknowledge we have to use refined terms or tags to constrain the search.
Already some of the comments above are things that WE know (as in the demographic on this forum), but that events in the media in the last four years also highlight there are a laaaarge number of people who are less educated and will believe things that are told to them, irrespective of accuracy.
So, perhaps google and these big advertising companies DO need to make some changes. Changes like:
- Transparency on what is or isn't a sponsored link (I think this is broadly done)
- Transparency on the algorithms
- Transparency on whether customers are signed up to "experimental searches" or other control sets, and make these an "opt in" ( https://theconversation.com/google-is-l ... igs-154178 )
The really tricky one is the question of what to do about "fake news". What is the extent of responsibility of the search and social moguls with respect to disinformation? Where does free speech start and end? Who decides what's real or not? You can't legislate for that. As soon as politics are involved in determining what is real or not you end up with Tiananmen Square and Auschwitz and the Capitol Hill events never having happened.
At best you can mandate a banner or tagging that clarifies whether an article is an opinion piece or News (as in, purely factual). But that wouldn't prevent a FACTUAL news brief where the interviewee spouts the same crap. It would be news that they said it, so it doesn't solve the problem. These are tough times we're coming into, and the golden age of the internet is ending.
Coming back to the Australia thing... what could happen?
- Google drops all AU news results and Australia suffers more. Some small player may come along in due course, but if they're a news aggregator or site, how are they going to monetise themselves in order to pay these news sites? It's bonkers.
- We open the door to Google and search engines paying for the news they publish. Now they have an incentive to push the news that has the best ROI (they're a business after all). Next, other services want to be paid by google , and we move in a very troublesome direction. A search engine must pay to link to a site.... wow.
You're basically talking about fragmenting the internet. Google and Co will only show commercially viable results. Alternative search providers step in to try and fill the gap, but suddenly you don't have the single, homogenous and reliable search engine you've been using for 20 years.
The very shape of the internet could change as a result.
I'm sure there's other points of view, but I could really do with hearing some!
Proud PW Member since 15/10/2003
A lurktastic 2678 posts!
Re: The Internet
I think that as more countries take their own steps to exerting some level of control over the tech giants we will ultimately end up with localised Internet. Similar to how China has the great firewall and now Russia has taken steps to ring fencing its own corner where it can better curate what people see. Makes their lives so much easier when authoritarian leaders don't want people to easily access certain sites. In Western nations I think it'll take more of a business oriented form.
It'll all come down to those with the largest funds lobbying local politicians for the most favourable terms that they can profit from. All its ever about is control and money.
Could you imagine being stuck in the UK where any Google search for news only ever delivered you to the propaganda and hate filled Daily Mail website.
It'll all come down to those with the largest funds lobbying local politicians for the most favourable terms that they can profit from. All its ever about is control and money.
Could you imagine being stuck in the UK where any Google search for news only ever delivered you to the propaganda and hate filled Daily Mail website.